[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>The system should be transparent. It doesn't have to be a democracy. One should have to meet certain criteria. And example would be:
1) 500+ posts total (or whatever number you choose)
2) Membership for 6 months miminum
3) Email interview....list qualifications, etc.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ironically, I remember that one point in favor of gEEk (remember him?) was that he had a relatively low
post count (under 200), but a very high rate of quality. He was an excellent mod; low-key, well-spoken, knowledgeable and level-headed.
Qualifications? Why? Your posting history makes a great resume, and we do go looking. After you've been at this for a while, you get a feel for who else might be good at it. It's an intuitive thing.
Minimum length of membership means much less than the regularity and quality of contributions.
Really, it takes a certain personality to do the job well. One of the reasons I tend to look askance at people who apply unsolicited is that the most reliable and efficient check against moderator abuse is a certain degree of caution and humility, and anything that looks like ambition raises a red flag with me. You don't give a sword to someone who wants to use it.
[quote]<strong>things like locking threads such as mods being required to provide an explanation for locking or moving (it seems to be only a courtesy now), guidelines on when to lock, etc. Now, it is quite vague to a newbie (what will get their thread locked).</strong><hr></blockquote>
We have gotten a little too comfortable with taking it for granted that the reasons are obvious. I used to be better at this; I'll renew my old vigilance.
[quote]<strong>I am also going to take issue with the message that was posted a few months ago (more recently perhaps) telling poeple to "watch the tone" of the boards because they had become quite negative. Unless there are rampant, unprovoked personal attacks, the "tone" is none of your business.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I posted that because "the tone" consisted of rampant, unprovoked personal attacks. If I objected to negativity in general I'd have been locking 9 out of 10 threads in Future Hardware for the past year!
Thanks for the feedback. I hope this clarified a few things.
[ 07-09-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>